Replies

We’ve fixed these false predictions

Ad hominem

The brush off

Falsificationism is flawed

If there are so many problems evolution would have been toppled

Those quoted believe in evolution

These falsifications will be remedied in the future

There is no better alternative

No one believes these predictions anymore

Sounds like 99% of hte ‘scientific counter-arguments’ presented here on FR everytime a scientific article brings to light the impossibilities of Macroevolution- Recall the mathematical statistics articles? “Mathematics doesn’t apply because it’s ‘linear’ and evolution isn’t linear’ (This ‘counter-argument’ was shown to be silly- but it still persists for some reason) “Thermodynamics doesn’t apply because the second law only applies to closed systems” (DESPITE the fact that the second law is even WORSE for open systems- this ‘coutner-argument’ still persists for some reason) “ID is a religion” “ID is psuedoscience” “Creationists are ignorant of ‘real’ science” ID’ers have to sign statmeents of faith- thus proving it’s religion” (Apparently implying that all ID’ers must sign statmeents of faith- somethign that is simply contrary to the FACTS, and despite hte FACT that those statements that a FEW MIGHT sign, is totally irrelevent to the scientific evidneces which EXPOSE the problems with naturalism)

It’s sad what represents counter-arguments to ID issues these days- yet soem insist on doing practically every one of htose bullet points above- apparently thinking it somehow constitutes sound counter-arguments.

[[This early complexity is also implied by genome data of the lower organisms. As one researcher observed, the genomes of many seemingly simple organisms sequenced in recent years show a surprising degree of complexity. [5,6] In fact, what we consistently find in the fossil record and genomic data are examples of high complexity in lineages where evolution expected simplicity.]]

Gosh- what a surprise- unnexpected complexity at a level that can’t be explained by naturalism

[[It is commonly believed that complex organisms arose from simple ones. Yet analyses of genomes and of their transcribed genes in various organisms reveal that, as far as protein-coding genes are concerned, the repertoire of a sea anemone—a rather simple, evolutionarily basal animal—is almost as complex as that of a human.]]

Woops- expect a major restucturing of naturalism

[[This is by no means an isolated example. Histones are a class of eukaryote proteins that help organize and pack DNA and the gene that codes for histone IV is highly conserved across species.]]

Hmmm- must have arose accidently in all species, orm ost that we know of, and not in the ‘first simplest organisms’ as once claimed- Aint nature wonderful how forward looking and omnipotent it must be? Supposedly directing mutations in order to create Histones across all apecies through accidental mistakes in each species exactly alike?

Can’t waitto read the rest to discover how omnipotent nature must have been in directing mistakes and including somehow al lthe metainfo necessary for each species to direct, control, utilize and assemble all the non species specific info being introduced- it will be wonderful to discover how nature provided hte means for species to receive new non species specific info without mucking up the whole species specificly complex works